https://twitter.com/KateEMcCann/status/1109077848210456576
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-47668926
A no-deal Brexit plan - in which one side of a motorway will be reserved for queuing lorries - will begin on Monday.
HGVs heading to the Port of Dover will use the coast-bound side of the M20, while all other traffic will be restricted to a contraflow system on the opposite side of the motorway.
It was designed to tackle disruption caused by delays at the border.
Fun times
"And I can’t flush all these red, white and blue lines away, they cost me loads. I’ll just get high on them one last time, then I’ll be properly ready.”
Britain then did a large amount of patriotic nonsense before adding: “****, I am out of it! Isambard Kingdom Brunel! We invented the internet, bitches! Bobby Moore! Stand on our own two feet! TAKE BACK CONTROL!”
Hahahaha.
I think a “no confidence” vote in the tory government now has a chance of passing. May has so upset so many tories and the DUP its quite possible enough would vote her down.
You'd like to think so TJ but turkeys are still unlikely to vote for an early Xmas just because they can't agree on the stuffing recipe.
Understand Number 10 now seriously considering indicative votes on Brexit next week.
Will indicative votes be for unicorns though? Will FoM redline be explicitly addressed? Will Customs Union voted on be on something implementable? Or more "freedom to strike own deals" and "a say in EU trade deals yet not bound by them" nonsense?
Bike parts became more expensive after the referendum and will go up again if we leave. We should stay in the EU if only for the bike bling.
Peston reckons MPs will bungle it & we'll end up in no deal in 3 weeks
commmon sense left this country 3 years ago
Well the ERG are sensing weakness
https://twitter.com/BethRigby/status/1109081895889973251
Bike parts became more expensive after the referendum and will go up again if we leave. We should stay in the EU if only for the bike bling.
I just ordered a new rotor from bike-discount.de for this very reason.
I think what offends me more than anything about this whole process is the amount of power over all our lives that seems to have ended up in the hands of jumped-up, obnoxious, little ****s like Mark Francois
+++++1111111!!!!!oneone
Boil on the arse of humanity.
I just ordered a new rotor from <span class="skimlinks-unlinked">bike-discount.de</span> for this very reason.
I'm on the cusp of buying something shiny new and carbony but couldn't arrange a test ride of my last option until the week after B-day. Extending to April 12th gives me just enough time 😀
Bike parts became more expensive after the referendum and will go up again if we leave. We should stay in the EU if only for the bike bling.
Taiwanese, USA and UK made stuff?
Some people need to look up the difference between "advisory" and "binding".
Advisory is what the referendum was (and why no supermajority or percentage of the electorate was defined to win as would be the case with a binding one).
Parliament decided to treat a non binding referendum as binding.
I guess they could decide to reverse that decision in the face of current events?
Put out a statement saying "We took your advice as far as possible and its all gone wrong."
Would that be a problem for you dazh & co.?
Cos it shouldn't 🙂
EDIT: I can see that such an approach would cause issues with "fervent leavers", but frankly, there is no brexit (or anything else) that would solve their problems anyway.
I’m on the cusp of buying something shiny new and carbony but couldn’t arrange a test ride of my last option until the week after B-day. Extending to April 12th gives me just enough time 😀
I assume that was what Tusk had in mind when making his suggestion, no?
Taiwanese, USA and UK made stuff?
£ crashing will screw us, the magic no tariff state sounds like it won't last long. UK parts will rise on the increased cost of Aluminium required etc. anything with stuff requiring imported goods will suffer. Every time a bad exits gets close the pound drops.
So driving to Austria this Wednesday and coming back on 12th April might not be the best plan I’ve ever had I’m thinking.
If TM is serious about indicative votes, the options on the table need to be sensible and achievable. Preferably agreed cross party. I liked the idea of all options voted for, bottom one drops out each time.
Taiwanese, USA and UK made stuff?
Yes, we can get them via European shops imported at low rates due to their trade deals.
Oh well...UK made is still on the list (provided raw material prices don't become an issue).
Edit - or what Mike said, take you pick really.
If TM is serious about indicative votes,
What makes you imagine that she is, given that the ERG are strongly opposed to them?
Parliament decided to treat a non binding referendum as binding.
And in the subsequent 2017 general election both the main parties manifestos stated that they would honour the referendum and implement Brexit,even the SNP stated that it would decide what to do about a second Indy ref. after the Brexit process.Something mikesmith conveniently keeps neglecting to remember when he refers to the "3 year old 2016 referendum" outcome.
Preferably agreed cross party. I liked the idea of all options voted for, bottom one drops out each time.
I don't, I could see some sensible options dropped early in parliamentary voting, then as only the insane options are left everyone going "oh we ****ed it up again". There has been nothing in the past 3 years that make me believe government or parliament is capable of acting sensibly and in the nations best interests.
And in the subsequent 2017 general election both the main parties manifestos stated that they would honour the referendum and implement Brexit,even the SNP stated that it would decide what to do about a second Indy ref. after the Brexit process.Something mikesmith conveniently keeps neglecting to remember when he refernces the 3 year old 2016 referendum outcome.
So with both parties major parties going hell for leather to implement brexit instead of trying to deal with the underlying wealth disparity, lies and corruption, the public wasn't given a realistic alternative at that election.
And in the subsequent 2017 general election both the main parties manifestos stated that they would honour the referendum and implement Brexit
worked out well didn't it...
DrJ - BBC reported exactly that. None of us are in the room so that’s all we have.
So nothing binding this government to its result at all.
The people were promised the result would be enacted. I appreciate you want to grasp at whatever flimsy straw exists to reverse the result but it doesn’t change the reality.
The people were promised the result would be enacted.
they were also promised £350 million a week and the 'easiest negotiation ever'.
when does that get delivered?
Unfortunatly the reality is not what you seem to think daz.
1) the referendum was advisory
2) NO government can bind its successor
3) most of us actually want a mechanism for stopping this nonsense and its perfectly possible and legal for parliament to say no to brexit ( if unlikely)
4) a second referendum changes everything. a second referendum trumps the first.
People were promised many things in the campaign, virtually all have been proven to be lies. Implementing brexit is still the action that will destroy most lives, and is absolute insanity. Time that was explained more freely instead of just regurgitating "brexit means brexit" and "leave won so shut up and get on with it".
nick1962
I think a “no confidence” vote in the tory government now has a chance of passing. May has so upset so many tories and the DUP its quite possible enough would vote her down.
You’d like to think so TJ but turkeys are still unlikely to vote for an early Xmas just because they can’t agree on the stuffing recipe.
It would only take half a dozen tories to vote for the no confidence motion. 2 have already left the party 4 toryies with the decency to put country before party. Its certainly possible
Just have a binding referendum, in or out, status quo is we"re leaving needs to be a super majority to change to remain... 45 vs 55% enough to convince?
I don’t, I could see some sensible options dropped early in parliamentary voting, then as only the insane options are left everyone going “oh we **** it up again”. There has been nothing in the past 3 years that make me believe government or parliament is capable of acting sensibly and in the nations best interests.
Indeed. I'm really not comfortable with such a voting process taking place in a highly pressurised environment that is practically in a state of panic. You may as well toss a coin.
As a civilisation, we are smart enough to deal with these problems, and we are smart enough to know that the entire process has become irrational. We need to deal with these problems before proceeding any further.
Something mikesmith conveniently keeps neglecting to remember when he refers to the “3 year old 2016 referendum” outcome.
Mentioned it a few times now, there is no link to a preference on Brexit to Labour or Tory votes, many people voted on a great deal of issues that had nothign to do with Brexit, some votes for both parties had more to do with Tuition fees than the Brexit referendum.
It would only take half a dozen tories to vote for the no confidence motion.
Ken Clark could be first on the list, plenty of others who have just been called out by the PM as the problem.
If TM is serious about indicative votes
Given her bloody-minded determination to avoid any democratic oversight whatsoever, and the fact that the only thing that separates her from a dictator is that she hasn't started wearing military regalia (yet), any votes will be a token gesture. If she holds them at all (which she won't) they'll be advisory and she'll go on to ignore them like she ignored the 'cross-party' talks she had, and has ignored everyone else other than the ERG.
I was convinced we'd be crashing out next week. Now I'm still equally as convinced she's just moved the date we crash out at back a few weeks. Just to torture us all that little bit more with some misplaced false hope. The demented bitch!
Interesting article here about how a 'democratic' process can quite easily produce a result that is anything other than democratic. This is what we have now and my concern is that the indicative vote process could end up delivering something really daft that nobody wants - ie we are no better off.
How a Strange Massachusetts Election Helps Explain Britain’s Brexit Chaos
Taiwanese, US, China, India, etc - it's all being traded through the EU common agreements, but don't worry because Liam fox has free trade agreements sorted with all these countries*
* he doesn't
Bit old now but, re Euro
"dantsw13
Member
It is for new joiners, no?"
It is- but there's no mechanism to force adoption, so essentially it's mandatory to say you'll do it, but not to actually do it. If you had to put any real effort into it you could easily fail to meet one of the accession requirements and make it so you're not just failing to do so, but actually not allowed to adopt the euro.
No dazh,
The reality is that more democracy (due to pressure from the people) is not a denial of democracy.
A majority of people want a second vote. Polls indicate that Remain would win.
I think we all know that polls can be wrong, but on the basis that the majority appear to want a vote, and that the differences between remain and leave are well outside the error bars, exactly whose rights are you arguing for.
Stuff is not just traded via EU agreements, it actually gets shipped to us via the EU physically.
My business procures large amounts of IT kit and pretty much all of it comes via Rotterdam, despite the fact that it is manufactured in the far east by US companies.
I can't see how that is significantly different for bike bits or any other mass produced stuff to be honest?
Advisory is what the referendum was (and why no supermajority or percentage of the electorate was defined to win as would be the case with a binding one).
This is just made up, one thing makes a referendum legally binding, an act of parliament coming into force if the result goes a particular way - nothing else - the AV referendum was done on this basis as, the 1979 Scottish Devolution referendum seems to have been as well (I guess the Welsh one may have been too). A formal supermajority has never been required in any referendum in the UK, although you could argue that the 1979 Scottish referendum effectively had a hybrid one, but the split required was dependent upon turnout.
EDIT: 1979 Weslh referendum was done on the same basis.
But still this is all just distraction and diversion while we try and avoid the real issues.
May's deal Yes or No
If No what next.
Options open
Leave No Deal
Ask for Long extension tied to political change
Extension to consult the people
Revoke
Pick One
binners
"The demented **"
Back in the 80's they had " Ditch the **" badges referring to Thatcher.
It was called out as inapprporite then and it still is now.
At least you're not calling for her to be hanged though which I suppose is some progress.
Taiwanese, USA and UK made stuff?
We discussed this years ago. You've had nearly three years to inform yourself.
Interesting article here about how a ‘democratic’ process can quite easily produce a result that is anything other than democratic. This is what we have now and my concern is that the indicative vote process could end up delivering something really daft that nobody wants – ie we are no better off.
How a Strange Massachusetts Election Helps Explain Britain’s Brexit Chaos
Posted 12 minutes ago
Enjoyed reading that and it does indeed have lots of parallels to this brexit problem.
I think most people (unless it suits them not to) agree the original Ref was deeply flawed - it was Remain / Leave, nice and easy, but in reality it allowed EVERYONE who wanted a different relationship with the EU to pool their votes. (even forgetting about Unicorns for now).
If there had been a second question around "what deal do you want after Brexit" then the same thing that happened in Massachusetts would happened here, there would probably 4 questions: No deal for the loonies and Hedge Fund Managers, Jobs First for Hard-Left, Banking and Finance First for the Right and 'best for most' which of course is in reality the deal we have now or 'remain' - we'd leave with the first question and remain with the second because Remainers were, and are united in what they want.
It is- but there’s no mechanism to force adoption, so essentially it’s mandatory to say you’ll do it, but not to actually do it.
That'sthe sort of wriggle room that the backstop requires 😉
The referendum was to seek a mandate for a specific action that cannot easily be reversed. It is very different to a general election,
So that implies that having a third vote is undemocratic? That's a leap.
though you will be aware that the last general election also gave an overwhelming majority to parties committed to leaving the EU.
Oh, please keep it honest.
There was a large amount of tactical voting. I myself voted labour - a party "committed to leave" as you say - because I live in a tightly contested Labour / Tory constituency. It was, and still is, a Labour seat but there's only a handful of votes in it. I didn't vote in favour of Labour, rather I voted against the Tories, a vote for any other party would have been a wasted vote. If it were the best chance of ousting May I'd have given serious consideration to holding my nose and voting for UKIP.
The notion that loads people voted for leave parties so must have been in favour of leave is just propaganda.
I don’t recall seeing Cameron’s name on the ballot paper.
I don't recall seeing your other claims on the ballot paper either. What's your point?
